This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Solaris 64-bit compilation fails with otherwise successful gcc-3.1
Jeff Sturm mentioned that either the static versions of libc and libm
are not in the same directory or they are differently named (in addition
to the suffix change from so to a) and that gcc bootstrap should compile
64-bit as well as 32-bit versions of the libraries. When I remove the
-static from the Makefile, thus producing a dynamically linked
executable, it gets compiled and linked successfully but fails when I
attempt to execute it.
ld.so.1: ./par_antenna: fatal: /space/gcc-inst/lib/libstdc++.so.4: wrong
ELF class: ELFCLASS32
This was what made me question if I explicitly needed to specify a
64-bit library during the bootstrap by
make CFLAGS='-O -m64' LIBCFLAGS='-g -O2 -m64' LIBCXXFLAGS='-g -O2 -m64'
On Mon May 27, 2002 at 08:29:40AM +0200,
Robert Schiele (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
> On Sun, May 26, 2002 at 10:30:18PM -0700, George.R.Goffe@seagate.com wrote:
> > Jeff,
> > I think the path /usr/lib/64 is an IRIX phenonema, don't you mean
> > /usr/lib/sparcv9?
> You are right, the libraries are located under /usr/lib/sparcv9, but
> at least on Solaris 8 there are symbolic links from /usr/lib/64 to
> this directory, so it doesn't mind.
> Robert Schiele Tel.: +49-621-181-2583
> Dipl.-Wirtsch.informatiker mailto:email@example.com
Alaeddin Ahmet Aydiner - PhD candidate _ _ _
Office Tel: 217 333 0434 / \ / \ / \
377 CCEM Everitt Laboratory MC 702 /---\ /---\ /---\
Electrical & Computer Eng. Dept. UIUC 61801 / \. / \. / \.